TOPIC:

martin_csr wrote: What kit did he get? The 650C isn't included in the model application list for the OR2612 kit.

Nessism wrote: I think you nailed it Martin.
...(snip)...
I wonder if that petcock kit can be made to work if the hole in the plastic part is opened up? It's a gamble, but not much to lose at this point eh?

Hey Gents. I hadda wait until I got back to my pc so I could look closer at the pics you both provided...

So, I don't know whether or not this "kit" is listed for a 650C, again, I searched specifically for the diaphragm part number and like a gajillion results came back, all with this exact same (appearing) diaphragm. I didn't order the cheapest listing either ($35... you decide) but I ordered instead based on bigger business, located in the USA and okay, free shipping because it galls me to pay for a part that would fit in an envelope and mail USPS for a buck anywhere but the seller has flat ship fee of something stupid like $5 or whatever.
Point is, I searched and ordered the part based upon the part number listed way above in Ed's posting. It looked the same as the pic, so I figured it was probably safe. BTW, I already had the other seals for the petcock anyway (bought them back in 2007 I guess?), it was just the spring and diaphragm I couldn't find.

Okay, now I have it and obviously, there was a design change in the plate that separates the two rubber elements on the plunger shaft. My old "Top Hat" plunger style vs the later O-ring style. I am pretty darn sure this petcock is an original part and not one that got changed out in the apparently 2-3 years this bike was on the road back in the late 70's or early 80's because everything else that wasn't removed is original.
Here's a pic of my petcock on the vacuum port / diaphragm / plunger side for reference to Martin's pic above:


I can see that clearly the body of my petcock was changed with respect to the vacuum chamber - Ed and Martin's I'm reasonably sure are the same as Martin's picture since both of you were able to use this ... "later model?" diaphragm setup.
I rechecked and when I place the late-style diaphragm into the vacuum chamber, I can feel the tip of the plunger falls into the deep hole and the rubber O-ring is seating against the bottom. So it's reasonable to assume it would function just like it does for y'all.

I'm willing to give the thing a shot at modification of the plate I have - step-up drilling the hole so this later style diaphragm would install through it but I am not certain how big to make that hole?
I measured the plastic plate across at 36mm and in my unit the inner recess step-down for the diaphragm spring-plate is 30mm. So I'm guessing that the hole in your plates is about 20mm-ish? That would leave a 5mm land for the aluminum plate to seat around the perimeter when the spring presses it back down and allow the O-ring to seat. At least, I can test this functionality after assembly by just sucking on the vacuum line and see what if anything happens.

Of course all this relies on me being able to drill out the hole accurately and not have the plastic plate shatter or crumple in the process as it is very old (although looks solid enough).

In the process, I'll eat the "kit" cost too and if unsuccessful have to order that Suzuki petcock from Z1 which has worked for Enhanced on his 650-D / SR.

Now you see how this bike's entire restoration process has gone for me? LOL. I nailed it in the beginning - "Reluctant".

Just in case y'all have missed my thread which is getting long in the tooth; here she is now:



Damn, I'm itchin' to get it on the road and twist that throttle...

Nice.
Steve

After reading the info on the kz650 site I don't think you can use that kit. That petcock is designed to use the top hat type sealing plunger. I think that petcock is a lost cause.

The tophat type that you have is something I've never seen. I've been around the KZ650 since I bought one new 38yrs ago and have fooled with many a petcock, replaced many a petcock, and none of them used that design. Looking at the link to the KZ650 forum it appears a part they used but never supplied replacement parts for. Maybe a short time the supplier for the normal type petcock ran low on supply and they used another vendor. Don't know, but I wouldn't be too hard on the seller of the parts. The type diaphram they sent is what they all used except a select few.

If it were me, I'd return the parts and buy the one suggested. At least it's readily available and likely easy to replace.
Steve

Yes, I finally came to the same conclusion:



Maybe KZombie just needed borrowed body parts?

At least you can get it.
Steve

Thanks for the support Steve. I agree and it's not like I'm a Kawi-nazi or anything. I've owned as many Suzi's in my life as KZs now so it's all good. If it fits and works is all that matters at this point.

I gotta say a big THANK YOU to all the guys here. The amount of knowledge and experience with these kwazy kool Kawasakiis is really mind blowing! I would have never unraveled this mystery on my own even with every manual I own.

So, one more step closer...

I was able to work on all kinds of bikes. The Susies, Yammers and Hondas didn't turn my crank like the Kaws.
Steve

No eBay APP ID and/or Cert ID defined in Kunena configurationJust to kind of close the story on the differing parts I did a little more research and found that as already mentioned the tophat type was the early vacuum petcock that was rarely seen and quickly updated to the newer type that uses the 43028-1015 diaphram. The correct diaphram for the tophat petcock is 43028-1004. The two petcocks are completely different and no parts the same. See ebay for a correct diaphram for the very reasonable price of $110.00

That Susie part looks better and better all the time.
Steve

Dayum! I feel like i dodged a bullet here!

Thanks again to all of you guys that helped sleuth out this mystery for me. [High Five emoji here]